Games using tangible projectile – Player held and powered – nonmechanical projector – per se,... – Bat
Reexamination Certificate
2001-05-22
2004-06-29
Graham, Mark S. (Department: 3711)
Games using tangible projectile
Player held and powered, nonmechanical projector, per se,...
Bat
C473S567000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06755757
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to game device and tool handle lightweight cores and more particularly to composite over-wrapped lightweight wooden, metal and foam cores.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
In many types of sports equipment, such as baseball, hockey and lacrosse, for instance, the handle portion thereof is usually made of a hard, smooth material such as wood or aluminum. consequently, the handle becomes slippery when in the course of the game moisture from the hands of the user coats the handle surface.
Friction tape which makes use of a porous cloth which is permeated by adhesive has commonly been used by athletes. This characteristic stickiness gives the handle an unpleasant feel and furthermore does little to cushion the hands against shocks resulting from the contact of the sports equipment with the object to be hit.
Furthermore, it has been found difficult in practice to decrease the overall weight of sports equipment since it would lead to weaker and less stiff equipment thereby resulting in breakage and lower performance standards.
It should also be noted that a baseball bat made of wood, for instance, has a relatively small “sweet zone” where the contact of the baseball with the bat will result in maximum energy transfer.
Baseball bats have traditionally been made of wood. Today, wood baseball bats are all made of heavy and strong hardwoods, primarily ash. Ash (or other similar hardwoods such as hickory or birch) baseball bats result in bats where the rule of thumb is the length in inches equals the weight in ounces. Thus, today's wood baseball bats limit bat speed and also, are prone to catastrophic breakage. Such catastrophic breakage could lead to injury of not only players but also to bystanders and are a real concern to authorities. Also, as wood bats dry out (i.e. loose moisture), they lose strength and breakage increases.
The following is a comparison of the densities of various types of hardwoods and softwoods based on weight when oven dry and volume at 12% moisture content, taken from data contained in the Wood Handbook—Wood as an Engineering Material, published in 1999 by Forest Products Society of Madison, Wis.:
Density lb/ft
3
Hardwood
Hickory, true Mockernut
50.3
Yellow Birch
43.3
White Ash
41.9
Paper Birch
39.1
Yellow Poplar
29.4
Aspen Bigtooth
27.3
Aspen Quaking
26.6
Softwood
Fir Balsam
24.5
Cottonwood-Balsam poplar
23.8
Balsa
11.2
Density of wood is generally proportional to strength and stiffness. For example yellow poplar is 30% lighter than white ash with a corresponding decrease in strength. Hardwoods are both stronger and stiffer than softwoods and, most importantly, they are more impact resistant than softwoods. Only hardwoods have the required strength and impact resistance for baseball bats of the invention.
More recently, aluminum baseball bats have captured a large majority market share versus wood bats, even though they are more expensive and players complain about vibrations and the “pinging” sound when a baseball is hit. There are two reasons for the aluminum bat's success: 1) they are lighter than wood baseball bats, thus increasing bat speed and increasing hitting distance, and 2) they are less prone to breakage than wood bats.
Most recently, in an attempt to further lower weights of aluminum bats, thinner walled aluminum bats have been produced; however, problems have been encountered with balls leaving depressions in the bat and also, bat breakage.
U.S Pat. No. 4,014,542, which issued to Tanikawa on Mar. 29, 1977, describes a five component baseball bat having a softwood balsam core, a main member made of foam, a metal tube having apertures for bonding fixed to the barrel portion only of the main member, and an outer layer of glass fibre which is painted with a synthetic resin. Even though Tanikawa's bat is durable and is designed to reduce the shock caused by contact with a baseball, Tanikawa does not improve hitting performance by reducing the weight of the bat when compared to a conventional bat, while at the same time enhancing bat strength and stiffness. Moreover, the construction of Tanikawa's bat is not a “structural sandwich” which combines a single strong thin composite outer layer with a thick lightweight core to reduce the overall weight of the bat while at the same time enhancing bat strength, stiffness and durability.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,458,330, which issued to Baum on Oct. 17, 1995, describes a multi-component bat having between five and eleven layers. Baum's bat includes external layers of wood veneer over a plurality of resin impregnated fabric socks, which in turn surround inner cores of foam, wood or aluminum which may include cavities. Baum's bat is designed to have the appearance of a conventional wood bat with the objective of being less susceptible to breakage and comparable in performance. Baum, however, does not improve hitting performance by reducing the weight of the bat when compared to a conventional bat, while at the same time enhancing bat strength and stiffness. Neither does the construction of Baum's bat comprise a “structural sandwich” for reducing weight while maintaining or enhancing bat strength, durability and performance.
The following is a specific properties chart showing the density, stiffness and strength properties of various possible materials for use in making baseball bats. All data is taken from standard text books available in the field. Specific stiffness and specific strength are actual stiffness and strength divided by density respectively. Strengths for composite materials are given as tensile strength measured along fiber direction in a unidirectional part. Strength for wood is given as the minimum of tensile and compressive ultimate strength. Strength for metal is given as ultimate tensile strength. Densities of white ash, yellow poplar and bigtooth aspen are taken from the above table of wood densities:
Density
Stiffness
Specific
Strength
Specific
Materials
lbs/ft
3
M/SI
Stiffness
K/SI
Strength
Steel AISI 304
487
30.00
3.90
85.00
10.90
Aluminum 6061-T6
169
10.00
3.70
45.00
16.60
Aluminum 7075-T6
169
10.00
3.70
83.00
30.50
Titanium Ti-75A
283
17.00
3.70
80.00
17.70
High Modulus
102
38.00
23.30
165.00
100.00
Graphite
Intermediate
102
34.00
19.50
180.00
109.80
Modulus Graphite
Commercial
98
21.00
13.30
210.00
132.90
Graphite
E-Glass
130
17.00
3.10
135.00
64.30
S-Glass
124
8.00
4.00
155.00
77.60
Kevlar 49
86
11.00
8.00
210.00
152.20
White Ash
42
2.00
3.00
8.00
12.10
Bigtooth Aspen
27
1.00
2.30
4.00
9.30
Yellow Poplar
29
1.10
2.40
4.50
9.80
Polymer composites are over 16 times stronger than ash and 60% stronger than aluminum. However, they are over three times heavier than ash while approximately 20% lighter than aluminum, those being hollow therefore lighter than solid composite bats, on an equal volume basis. In summary, an all polymer composite baseball bat would be much stronger than either an ash or aluminum bat, but would be much too heavy.
By careful selection and combination of materials of varying densities, strengths and stiffness, such as those listed above, the applicant has been able to achieve weights for various baseball bat models (for example softball, youth, baseball, etc.) that are lower than traditionally constructed bats and that, at the same time, have improved mechanical properties, such as strength, stiffness and durability, and thus improved performance.
The performance, durability and appearance of sports equipments can be dramatically improved by construction of such equipments, with lighter cores over-wrapped by polymer composite.
We shall discuss the invention through its application to a baseball bat but it is understood that it applies to other sports equipment and tool handles as well if applicable.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
In view of the foregoing, a main object of the present invention is to provide a highly frictional surface, uniform in appearance for sports equipment.
More particularly, an object of this invention is to provide a lighter weight, stronger and stiffer sports equipment having
CE Composites Baseball Inc.
Graham Mark S.
Greer Burns & Crain Ltd.
LandOfFree
Composite over-wrapped lightweight core and method does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Composite over-wrapped lightweight core and method, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Composite over-wrapped lightweight core and method will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3298250